Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 17/925,406

TURBOMACHINE EXHAUST CASE

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Nov 15, 2022
Examiner
KANG, EDWIN G
Art Unit
3741
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
SAFRAN
OA Round
6 (Final)
65%
Grant Probability
Moderate
7-8
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 65% of resolved cases
65%
Career Allow Rate
212 granted / 328 resolved
-5.4% vs TC avg
Strong +69% interview lift
Without
With
+68.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
369
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
50.7%
+10.7% vs TC avg
§102
20.1%
-19.9% vs TC avg
§112
26.5%
-13.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 328 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the radially inner edge (which should be identified by a numeral) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. The drawings are objected to because replacement drawings of at least Figs. 2-4 should be submitted because the lines are not well defined, and not sufficiently dense and dark, so that these Figures do not permit adequate reproduction, see MPEP 608.02(V). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1, 7-9, 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Goulds (US 20190242264) PNG media_image1.png 388 678 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 384 700 media_image2.png Greyscale Annotated Figure 6 and 8 of Goulds Regarding claim 1, Goulds discloses an exhaust case (The casing of Figure 6; 104) for a turbomachine (Figure 6; 100), the exhaust case extending along a longitudinal axis (Figure 6; 108) and, comprising: an annular shroud (Figure 8; 106) having a wall (The wall forming the annular shroud) extending axially along the longitudinal axis from a first flange (Annotated Figure 8; labeled first flange which is the substantially vertical dashed line of radially inner wall portion), a plurality of openings (Figure 8; 116) being provided through the wall; and a plurality of mouths (The mouths described hereafter) each forming a channel (The channel in Figure 8; 122 for 119) extending between a respective inlet (The inlet of the channel at Figure 8; 123) and one of the openings (Figure 8; 116) such that a secondary airflow (Figure 8; 119) through each mouth can feed gases into a main airflow (Figure 8; 129) through the annular shroud, each mouth having: a docking flange (Figure 8; 123 for 122) at the inlet, the docking flange having a radially inner edge (Annotated Figure 8; labeled radially inner edge) extending between, and in contact with, the first flange of the annular shroud and a radially inner wall portion (Annotated Figure 8; labeled radially inner wall portion) consisting of a surface (The top slanted dashed line of Annotated Figure 8; labeled radially inner wall portion) contained entirely within the channel, said radially inner wall portion being formed by a thickened section (Annotated Figure 8; labeled thickened section) made on the wall of the shroud. Regarding claim 7, Goulds discloses the invention as claimed. Goulds further discloses pressure regulation unit (The pressure regulation unit described below) for the turbomachine, the pressure regulation unit comprising: the exhaust case according to claim 1, a bleed module (Figure 6; 135 and Annotated Figure 6; labeled pipe) configured to bleed a pressurised air flow (The pressurized air flow from the compressor) upstream of the exhaust case, the bleed module comprising an inlet pipe (Annotated Figure 6; labeled pipe) and a valve (Figure 6; 135) configured to shut off the inlet pipe (Functional Language, Paragraph 0073, the bleed valves can vent the bleed air, so that it can also not vent the bleed air. Also, Paragraph 0004), and a distribution module (Figure 6; 137, 136) configured to distribute a bleed flow (The bleed flow from the compressor) to the mouths of the exhaust case, the distribution module comprising: a distribution pipe (Figure 6; 137) into which the inlet pipe opens, and a plurality of injection pipes (Figure 6; 136) each connected to the distribution pipe and respectively to one of the mouths. Regarding claim 8, Goulds discloses the invention as claimed. Goulds further discloses the turbomachine comprising the exhaust case according to claim 1. Regarding claim 9, Goulds discloses the invention as claimed. Goulds further discloses an aircraft (Intended use, The aircraft for the turbomachine. Paragraph 0003, 0032, 0062 states a propulsive thrust, so that the turbomachine is used in an aircraft) comprising the turbomachine according to claim 8. Regarding claim 16, Goulds discloses the invention as claimed. Goulds further discloses wherein the wall of the annular shroud is extending axially along the longitudinal axis from the first flange to a second flange (Annotated Figure 8; labeled second flange) that is downstream from the first flange, and wherein the plurality of openings are provided through the wall in between the first flange and the second flange along the longitudinal axis (The openings are between the first and second flange). Regarding claim 17, Goulds discloses the invention as claimed. Goulds further discloses wherein the thickened section of the annular shroud integrally forms the radially inner wall portion (The thickened section integrally forms the radially inner wall portion), the thickened section being between the first flange and the plurality of openings along the longitudinal axis (The thickened section is between the first flange and the openings). Regarding claim 18, Goulds discloses the invention as claimed. Goulds further discloses wherein the radially inner edge section is entirely between the radially inner wall portion and the first flange along the longitudinal axis (The radially inner edge is entirely between the radially inner wall portion and the first flange along the longitudinal axis). Regarding claim 19, Goulds discloses the invention as claimed. Goulds further discloses wherein the channel is delimited by the radially inner wall portion and a radially outer wall portion (Annotated Figure 8; labeled radially outer wall portion) that is opposite to the radially inner wall portion, and wherein the plurality of openings are downstream from the inlet along the longitudinal axis (The openings are downstream from the inlet along the longitudinal axis). Claim(s) 2, 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goulds in view of Martensson (US 20060277919 as referenced in OA dated 10/11/2023). Regarding claim 2, Goulds discloses the invention as claimed. Goulds does not disclose wherein at least one of the mouths further has a plurality of fins in the channel. However, Martensson teaches a case (Figure 12; 41) for a turbomachine (The gas turbine engine of Paragraph 0002) comprising: at least one mouth (Figure 12; 40) having a plurality of fins (Figure 12; 47) in a channel (The channel where Figure 12; 47are located). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Goulds wherein at least one of the mouths further has a plurality of fins in the channel as taught by and suggested by Martensson in order to guide the bleed gas flow (Paragraph 0039, The modification adds fins to the mouths). Regarding claim 12, Goulds in view of Martensson teaches the exhaust case according to claim 2. Goulds further discloses a pressure regulation unit (The pressure regulation unit described below) for the turbomachine, the pressure regulation unit comprising: the exhaust case, a bleed module (Figure 6; 135 and Annotated Figure 6; labeled pipe) configured to bleed a pressurised air flow (The pressurized air flow from the compressor) upstream of the exhaust case, the bleed module comprising an inlet pipe (Annotated Figure 6; labeled pipe) and a valve (Figure 6; 135) configured to shut off the inlet pipe (Functional Language, Paragraph 0073, the bleed valves can vent the bleed air, so that it can also not vent the bleed air. Also, Paragraph 0004), and a distribution module (Figure 6; 137, 136) configured to distribute a bleed flow (The bleed flow from the compressor) to the mouths of the exhaust case, the distribution module comprising: a distribution pipe (Figure 6; 137) into which the inlet pipe opens, and a plurality of injection pipes (Figure 6; 136) each connected to the distribution pipe and respectively to one of the mouths. Regarding claim 13, Goulds in view of Martensson teaches the exhaust case according to claim 2. Goulds further discloses the turbomachine comprising the exhaust case. Regarding claim 14, Goulds in view of Martensson teaches the invention as claimed. Goulds further discloses wherein said mouth comprises a mouth wall (The wall defining Figure 8; 122) defining a radially outer wall portion (Annotated Figure 8; labeled radially outer wall portion), and wherein said radially outer wall portion and said radially inner wall portion define said channel through which air flows. Claim(s) 3, 4, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goulds in view of Wang et al (US 20100303610 as referenced in OA dated 1/16/2025) PNG media_image3.png 461 631 media_image3.png Greyscale Annotated Figure 1 of Wang Regarding claim 3, Goulds discloses the invention as claimed. Goulds does not disclose wherein the thickened section has at least one cavity. However, Wang teaches an exhaust case (Figure 1; 10, Paragraph 0012. The turbine section of a gas turbine engine is an exhaust for at least the combustor); wherein a thickened section (Annotated Figure 1; labeled thickened section) has at least one cavity (Annotated Figure 1; labeled cavity). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Goulds wherein the thickened section has at least one cavity as taught by and suggested by Wang because it has been held that applying a known technique, in this case Wang’s attachment means according to the steps described immediately above, to a known device, in this case, Gould’s exhaust case, ready for improvement to yield predictable results, in this case fastening components together, was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1396; MPEP 2143(D) (The modification uses the attachment means of Wang to connect Annotated Figure 8; labeled flange and first flange of Goulds). Regarding claim 4, Goulds in view of Wang teaches the invention as claimed. Goulds further discloses a flange (Annotated Figure 8; labeled flange) of a low-pressure turbine case (Annotated Figure 8; labeled low-pressure turbine case) Goulds does not disclose wherein the first flange of the exhaust case is formed with the thickened section and has holes each shaped for a passage of a rod of an assembly screw between the first flange and a flange of a low-pressure turbine case, and at least one hole opening into the at least one cavity which is shaped to receive an end of the rod of the assembly screw. However, Wang teaches wherein a first flange (Annotated Figure 1; labeled first flange) of the exhaust case is formed with the thickened section and has holes (The hole in Annotated Figure 1; labeled first flange for the assembly screw that is upstream of the dashed dotted line) each shaped for a passage of a rod of an assembly screw (Functional Language, the holes are shaped for the passage of Annotated Figure 8; labeled rode of the assembly screw) between the first flange and a flange (Annotated Figure 8; labeled flange), and at least one hole opening into the at least one cavity which is shaped to receive an end (Functional Language, the cavity is shaped to receive Annotated Figure 8; labeled end) of the rod of the assembly screw. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Goulds wherein the first flange of the exhaust case is formed with the thickened section and has holes each shaped for a passage of a rod of an assembly screw between the first flange and a flange (In the context of Goulds, the flange of Wang is the flange of the low-pressure turbine case of Goulds), and at least one hole opening into the at least one cavity which is shaped to receive an end of the rod of the assembly screw as taught by and suggested by Wang because it has been held that applying a known technique, in this case Wang’s attachment means according to the steps described immediately above, to a known device, in this case, Gould’s exhaust case, ready for improvement to yield predictable results, in this case fastening components together, was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1396; MPEP 2143(D) (This is the same modification as claim 3). Regarding claim 15, Goulds in view of Wang teaches the invention as claimed. Goulds does not disclose wherein the cavity includes a gap separating the end of the rod of the assembly screw and the thickened section. However, Wang teaches wherein the cavity includes a gap (The gap between Annotated Figure 1; labeled end and Annotated Figure 1; labeled thickened section) separating the end of the rod of the assembly screw and the thickened section. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Goulds wherein the cavity includes a gap separating the end of the rod of the assembly screw and the thickened section as taught by and suggested by Wang because it has been held that applying a known technique, in this case Wang’s attachment means according to the steps described immediately above, to a known device, in this case, Gould’s exhaust case, ready for improvement to yield predictable results, in this case fastening components together, was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1396; MPEP 2143(D) (This is the same modification as claim 3). Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goulds in view of Roach et al (US 20160153287 as referenced in OA dated 10/11/2023) Regarding claim 5, Goulds discloses the invention as claimed. Goulds does not disclose wherein the thickened section is formed with a honeycomb structure. However, Roach teaches wherein an exhaust case is formed with a honeycomb structure (Paragraph 0022). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Goulds wherein the thickened section is formed with a honeycomb structure as taught by and suggested by Roach in order to attenuate sound (Paragraph 0045. The modification has the exhaust case, which includes the mouth and thickened section in Goulds, formed with a honeycomb structure). Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goulds in view of Butcher et al (US 20200109668 as referenced in OA dated 10/11/2023) Regarding claim 6, Goulds discloses a method for manufacturing an exhaust case (The casing of Figure 6; 104), the method comprising: manufacturing the exhaust case extending along a longitudinal axis (Figure 6; 108), the exhaust case comprising: an annular shroud (Figure 8; 106) having a wall (The wall forming the annular shroud) extending axially along the longitudinal axis from a first flange (Annotated Figure 8; labeled first flange which is the substantially, a plurality of openings (Figure 8; 116) being provided through the wall; and a plurality of mouths (The mouths described hereafter) each forming a channel (The channel in Figure 8; 122 for 119) extending between a respective inlet (The inlet of the channel at Figure 8; 123) and one of the openings (Figure 8; 116) such that a secondary airflow (Figure 8; 119) through each mouth can feed gases into a main airflow (Figure 8; 129) through the annular shroud, each mouth having: a flange (Figure 8; 123 for 122) flange at the inlet having a radially inner edge (Annotated Figure 8; labeled radially inner edge) extending between (The radially inner edge is between the topmost portion of Annotated Figure 8; labeled flange and the topmost portion of radially inner wall portion), and in contact with, the first flange of the annular shroud and a radially inner wall portion (Annotated Figure 8; labeled radially inner wall portion) consisting of a surface (The top slanted dashed line of Annotated Figure 8; labeled radially inner wall portion) contained entirely within the channel, said radially inner wall portion being formed by a thickened section (Annotated Figure 8; labeled thickened section) made on the wall of the shroud. Goulds does not disclose wherein the mouths are produced by an additive manufacturing method. However, Butcher teaches wherein an exhaust case (Figure 2; 22) of a turbomachine (Figure 2; 10) is produced by an additive manufacturing method (Paragraph 0047). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Goulds wherein the mouths are produced by an additive manufacturing method as taught by and suggested by Butcher in order to reduce time to delivery (Paragraph 0050, The modification makes the exhaust casing, which includes the mouth, by additive manufacturing). Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goulds in view of Martensson as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Wang. Regarding claim 10, Goulds in view of Martensson teaches the invention as claimed. Goulds in view of Martensson does not teach wherein the thickened section has at least one cavity. However, Wang teaches an exhaust case (Figure 1; 10, Paragraph 0012. The turbine section of a gas turbine engine is an exhaust for at least the combustor); wherein a thickened section (Annotated Figure 1; labeled thickened section) has at least one cavity (Annotated Figure 1; labeled cavity). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Goulds in view of Martensson wherein the thickened section has at least one cavity as taught by and suggested by Wang because it has been held that applying a known technique, in this case Wang’s attachment means according to the steps described immediately above, to a known device, in this case, Goulds in view of Martensson’s exhaust case, ready for improvement to yield predictable results, in this case fastening components together, was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1396; MPEP 2143(D) (The modification uses the attachment means of Wang to connect Annotated Figure 8; labeled flange and first flange of Goulds). Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goulds in view of Martensson as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Roach. Regarding claim 11, Goulds in view of Martensson teaches the invention as claimed. Goulds in view of Martensson does not teach wherein the thickened section is formed with a honeycomb structure. However, Roach teaches wherein an exhaust case is formed with a honeycomb structure (Paragraph 0022). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Goulds in view of Martensson wherein the thickened section is formed with a honeycomb structure as taught by and suggested by Roach in order to attenuate sound (Paragraph 0045. The modification has the exhaust case, which includes the mouth and thickened section in Scott, formed with a honeycomb structure). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 6 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWIN G KANG whose telephone number is (571)272-9814. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00 PM EST. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Devon Kramer can be reached at (571) 272-7118. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /EDWIN KANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 15, 2022
Application Filed
Apr 14, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jul 10, 2023
Interview Requested
Jul 17, 2023
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jul 21, 2023
Examiner Interview Summary
Aug 17, 2023
Response Filed
Oct 05, 2023
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jan 09, 2024
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jan 09, 2024
Examiner Interview Summary
Feb 12, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 22, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 14, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Nov 19, 2024
Examiner Interview Summary
Nov 19, 2024
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Nov 20, 2024
Response Filed
Jan 13, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Mar 04, 2025
Interview Requested
Mar 13, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 13, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Apr 15, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
May 16, 2025
Notice of Allowance
May 16, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 05, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 07, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Oct 07, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Oct 07, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Oct 09, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 03, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Apr 06, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 13, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 13, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Apr 15, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601489
NOZZLE ASSEMBLY, COMBUSTOR AND GAS TURBINE COMPRISING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12584421
HEAT EXCHANGER WITH INLET AND OUTLET TURNING VANES FOR USE IN GAS TURBINE ENGINES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577923
EXHAUST NOZZLE AND A METHOD OF OPERATING AN EXHAUST NOZZLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12553385
COMPACT TURBOMACHINE COMBUSTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12540581
SYSTEM AND METHOD HAVING FLUID INJECTORS FOR ISOTHERMAL EXPANSION IN TURBINE STAGE OF GAS TURBINE ENGINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

7-8
Expected OA Rounds
65%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+68.7%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 328 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month